Boeing 787 news

[sn26567]

Want to know what it is like to fly the 787? Find out with the report from AvGeeks on a charter trip organised by United:

http://blogs.wsj.com/middleseat/2012/11 ... reamliner/

Many nice features: higher humidity in the cabin, pressurisation to lower altitude, quieter engines, cool lighting, large overhead bins, huge cabin windows, ...

But also some drawbacks: 3-3-3 seating adopted by most airlines (except ANA) is not wider than on a 737NG and uncomfortable for long trips, narrow aisles, cabin windows are placed too high, ...

Airlines should come back to the original Boeing layout: 3-2-3, or at least to the ANA international layout 2-4-2.

[cnc]

i've been on the 787 now and from a pax point of view the A/C doesn't really give you the WOW effect the A380 gives you.
on the otherhand the A380 is used as flagship, the 787 in most cases isn't.

[bollox]

I have the impression that Boeing and their Unions are playing their silly " end of year" games again, if this link is correct. http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1353585811.html
Any more news?

[RoMax]

JAL, ANA, UA, LAN and Ethiopian all praised the initial performance of the 787, QR also seems happy with their first results, LOT is too early to tell.

BUT we have still one problem, and I don't think I need to tell this problem is Air India...

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/business/news/air-india-summons-boeing-brass-poor-787s-029

According to AI, their first 787's have way too many technical snags, making them unreliable to operate. They are not happy and Boeing is about to send a top team to India to look at the mess.

Tough I have some question marks:
- Yes I assume their are technical problems with their 787's, it's a rather new type and AI has no experience with it (hence why Boeing sends big teams to each new customer to assist them with the EIS), but...
- Why aren't other airlines complaining about this? I assume certain airlines like ANA, JAL, United,... have WAY more experience with EIS of new aircraft and should know when things are going wrong and when not. But they all praise the support they get for the EIS and the initial performance.
- Even if there are problems, it seems to be Indian tradition to complain to the whole world before Boeing even got the chance to look at the mess. This is not just in aviation, this seems 'normal' when doing business in India (talking about government related business)
- Air India claims they didn't have these problems with the 777 some years ago. Well, first of all the 777 was in service for many years already (many initial technical problems dissapear as Boeing/Airbus/Embraer/... get more experience). Next to that, Air India was in much better shape itself when they introduced the 777. Now they face angry personnel, industrial actions, heavy losses, disputes between the management and the government,... Well I have the idea that may also have something to do with it... Hence why nobody is interested in the 777's that Air India tries to sell... I'm afraid we can compare some of these aircraft with the ex-Varig 777's and 767's or the 777's of TAAG (they fucked up the engines with way too powerfull take offs time after time, blaming Boeing for that), looking good on the first sight, but messed up quite some things (look at OO-TUC).

I have the idea Air India should first solve their own problems and show themself as a well run airline instead of being angry at Boeing for problems AI is probably partly the cause itself.

[RoMax]

Besides certain 'Indian sources' claim this is typicall Indian again. Air India is said to be facing the regular issues and indeed asked assistance from Boeing to resolve some of the problems. But the article is said to be seriously exagerated. The fact they claim to have this from top AI and CAA sources is said to be nonsense.

Tough my question marks about AI, the Indian CAA and their way of doing business are still valid. I have seriously doubts about the way they handle certain things...

[Streetstream]

JAL, ANA, UA, LAN and Ethiopian all praised the initial performance of the 787, QR also seems happy with their first results, LOT is too early to tell.

BUT we have still one problem, and I don't think I need to tell this problem is Air India...

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/business/news/air-india-summons-boeing-brass-poor-787s-029

According to AI, their first 787's have way too many technical snags, making them unreliable to operate. They are not happy and Boeing is about to send a top team to India to look at the mess.

Tough I have some question marks:
- Yes I assume their are technical problems with their 787's, it's a rather new type and AI has no experience with it (hence why Boeing sends big teams to each new customer to assist them with the EIS), but...
- Why aren't other airlines complaining about this? I assume certain airlines like ANA, JAL, United,... have WAY more experience with EIS of new aircraft and should know when things are going wrong and when not. But they all praise the support they get for the EIS and the initial performance.
- Even if there are problems, it seems to be Indian tradition to complain to the whole world before Boeing even got the chance to look at the mess. This is not just in aviation, this seems 'normal' when doing business in India (talking about government related business)
- Air India claims they didn't have these problems with the 777 some years ago. Well, first of all the 777 was in service for many years already (many initial technical problems dissapear as Boeing/Airbus/Embraer/... get more experience). Next to that, Air India was in much better shape itself when they introduced the 777. Now they face angry personnel, industrial actions, heavy losses, disputes between the management and the government,... Well I have the idea that may also have something to do with it... Hence why nobody is interested in the 777's that Air India tries to sell... I'm afraid we can compare some of these aircraft with the ex-Varig 777's and 767's or the 777's of TAAG (they fucked up the engines with way too powerfull take offs time after time, blaming Boeing for that), looking good on the first sight, but messed up quite some things (look at OO-TUC).

I have the idea Air India should first solve their own problems and show themself as a well run airline instead of being angry at Boeing for problems AI is probably partly the cause itself.

So are you saying that AI should not make the problems they are having public like the other airlines are doing and than you make one of your points that no other airline is complaining.

So basicly, if i read you right, you say that other airlines keep quiet about their problems and than you make it appear as if AI is the only airline that is experiencing problems. :S

[RoMax]

So are you saying that AI should not make the problems they are having public like the other airlines are doing and than you make one of your points that no other airline is complaining.

So basicly, if i read you right, you say that other airlines keep quiet about their problems and than you make it appear as if AI is the only airline that is experiencing problems. :S

First of all, I didn't say other airlines don't experience problems, I said the article seems to point at huge problems with AI making it almost impossible to operate the 787's on a normal basis (an that's something no other airline experiences). Besides that, no the other airlines are not complaining about their problems in the way AI does. If they get serious problems (like the RR-related issues with ANA) they just comunicate that they grounded their fleet for inspections, no finger pointing to Boeing or RR. The way the article comments is JUST finger pointint towards Boeing, no concrete exemples of the issues, no indications of Boeing that got the chance to investigate it,...
Is it going to help AI to talk like that about their brand new flagship aircraft in public? I don't think so, they should first try to solve the problems with Boeing.

But again, this seems to be the way Indian press handles these things. What I read after my initial post from Indian people is that it's just bulshit. Indian press hears something, pulls it out of context, claims they got it from high sources within the company and the Indian CAA and tries to make a huge story of something while there isn't a real problem. AI indeed has some troubles, as other airlines (I never denied that other airlines have troubles, I just said others are not complaining about it, something that's correct, they do communicate about certain problems, but that's something else than complaining!) and they asked more assistance from Boeing, nothing more, nothing less.

But my points remain valid, I still have my doubts about the way of working inside AI and they way they handle certain things.

[sn26567]

A mechanical problem diverts United 787

A United flight from Houston bound for Newark with 174 passengers and 10 crew members on board made an emergency landing in New Orleans this Tuesday because of a mechanical issue on a 13-day-old Boeing 787 Dreamliner plane. The flight landed safely without incident.

The diverted United 787 radioed fire crews at New Orleans to look signs of damage to the aircraft near the jet's aft electrical equipment bay (the 787's aft electrical bay is home to the jet's electrical power distribution, guiding power from its engines and APU). In November 2010, Boeing suffered an in-flight fire in the same electrical bay while on approach to Laredo, Texas, during a test flight.

[RoMax]

Seems serious, the flight crew indeed asked ground crew to inspect the outside of the "rear avionics bay" for evidence of fire.
Tough it may be less serious when you think about this: they got a warning about an electrical problem in one of the electrical bays (it doesn't seem like a big part of the systems fell out like it did during the fire during that certain test flight, but that was the intention of the redesign after all). With the history of that electrical bay, the crew (probably according to United rules) may wanted to be sure it was not fire once again.
On the other hand, they may have gotten a fire/smoke indication combined with an electrical warning...that would be something else...

At this moment it's not clear to me what exact indication they got (pure electrical or smoke/fire) and handled with the history of the specific electrical/avionics bay in mind just to be sure (in that case it's probably according to the rules of United, probably taking no risk talking about that system), or did they handled purely on the warnings they got.

A quote from the Aviation Herald:

Later on approach to New Orleans the crew reported they don't really expect anything however requested fire services to especially check the areas aft of the wings, they had some strong electrical current in the cargo areas. The aircraft landed safely on New Orleans' runway 10 about 30 minutes after leaving FL410 and stopped on the runway. Fire crews inspected the aircraft and reported they saw no discolourization or other indications of heat, fire or smoke, the aircraft subsequently taxied to the apron.

[Streetstream]

Is it true that all 787's have to have their wings fixed after several fuel leaks?

[RoMax]

Is it true that all 787's have to have their wings fixed after several fuel leaks?

There seems to be a production fault, Boeing and some days later the FAA ordered to inspect a certain place where the engines are connected to the wings on possible fuel leaks. These leaks were discovered at two 787's, about half of the current 38-counting delivered fleet has been inspected.

PS, this is something else than what happened with that United aircraft.

[Streetstream]

I really hope they can fix all these small bugs before it leaves an after taste. Even myself, a diehard Airbus man, must admit that the 787 is a great looking plane. Boeing sure has a winner here.

[sn26567]

Is it true that all 787's have to have their wings fixed after several fuel leaks?

FAA orders Boeing 787 inspections, cites fuel leak risk

US FAA has issued an airworthiness directive ordering Boeing 787 operators to inspect the aircraft for “improperly assembled” engine fuel feed manifold couplings.

There are currently 38 787s in service. In a notice published this week in the US government’s federal register, FAA said it has “received reports of fuel leaks on two different in-service [787s] and the subsequent discovery of several improperly assembled engine fuel feed manifold couplings on in-service and production airplanes.”

FAA did not mention which operators reported the fuel leaks, but Ethiopian Airlines has told ATW that it experienced a fuel leak on a 787 during initial operations, adding that the problem is now “resolved.”

FAA said the improper coupling installations “occurred during production” and include “couplings with missing or improperly installed lockwire, parts within the couplings installed in the wrong locations, incorrect parts installed in the couplings, and couplings that have extra parts installed.”

The agency added, “These conditions, if not corrected, could result in fuel leaks, which could lead to fuel exhaustion, engine power loss or shutdown, or leaks on hot engine parts that could lead to a fire … An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule.”

ATW has requested a comment from Boeing. The manufacturer told The Seattle Times that about 19 in-service 787s have already been inspected and the company is making the necessary changes in its 787 production process.

Source: ATW online

[andorra-airport]

Maybe already mentioned, but starting this summer, LANChile is going to fly the 787 on the route Santiago-Madrid-Frankfurt (and back). That means that you can book a flight between Frankfurt and Madrid, flying with a 787!

http://airlineroute.net/2012/12/08/la-787-s13update1/

[sn26567]

British Airways has disclosed the layout of seats for the 24 Dreamliners it will receive, starting in May 2013:

The British Airways Dreamliner will have a total of 214 passengers.

• In Club World (business) there will be 35 seats in the new Club World triple configuration of 2:3:2
• In World Traveller Plus (premium economy) there will be 25 seats in a layout of 2:3:2
• In World Traveller (economy) there will be 154 seats with a 3:3:3 configuration.

That looks very cramped, especially in business, if you ask me!

[Treeper]

I also think that looks cramped, but ict others like
ANA (1-2-1 and 1-1-1 in business, 2-4-2 in Y; 158 seat)
JAL (2-2-2 in business, 2-4-2 in Y; 186 seat)
UA (2-2-2- in business, 2-4-2 in both economy's; 219seat)
QR (1-2-1 in business, 3-3-3 in Y; 254 seat)
AI (2-2-2 in business, 3-3-3 in Y; 256 seat)
BA (214pax) is quite moderate/mediocre/ok. but business is terrible -> 2-3-2 what were they thinking?

[RoMax]

The A380 will get the same business class (2-3-2) on the upper deck (2-4-2 on the main deck), is there a big difference in the cabin width of the 787 and that of the A380-upper deck? Otherwise it's as bad in the A380 as in the 787...

The way they plan to place the seats is quite interesting btw:
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ba-to-have-469-seat-a380s-and-214-seat-787-8s-380056/
Does this makes it possible to keep a simular seat width as on their other aircraft, while having such a configuration? It looks strange in my opinion. I would like to see a picture of it.

[RoMax]

Btw, I just saw this picture on airliners.net of Qatar's 787:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Qatar-Airways/Boeing-787-8-Dreamliner/2198185/L/

This is completely what Boeing intended, a roomy, inviting entrance to the aircraft. Open (this picture is perfect to notice how much the overhead bins fold into the ceiling, while they are really big compared to older generation aircraft), light and still classy and comfortable.
I don't know how it looks on the other side, but I believe economy is more closed off from the business class (like it should be).

[Streetstream]

The A380 will get the same business class (2-3-2) on the upper deck (2-4-2 on the main deck), is there a big difference in the cabin width of the 787 and that of the A380-upper deck? Otherwise it's as bad in the A380 as in the 787...

If i'm not mistaken the A380's upper deck is 12.2 inches wider than the 787.

[earthman]

Btw, I just saw this picture on airliners.net of Qatar's 787:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Qatar-Airways/Boeing-787-8-Dreamliner/2198185/L/

This is completely what Boeing intended, a roomy, inviting entrance to the aircraft. Open (this picture is perfect to notice how much the overhead bins fold into the ceiling, while they are really big compared to older generation aircraft), light and still classy and comfortable.
I don't know how it looks on the other side, but I believe economy is more closed off from the business class (like it should be).

Ooooooohh fancy!

Too bad you're still stuck in a plastic tube for many hours.